Have you moved to Vista yet?

khelben1979 · Dec 27, 2008, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight_Breed

Well you are dealing with an operating system within X64 that is set to handle 4G of RAM or more. The 32 bit OS is set to utilize no more than 2.5G and with today's increasing requirements it might soon become a necessity and not just a choice.

I have had no OS run faster than Ultimate X64 and with I7 processors out and DDR3 RAM being utilized better I soon think 4G will become a minimum requirement with games and other software ...

That the 32 bit OS of Windows XP only could handle 2.5GB of RAM isn't right according to a source from Tom's hardware. Look here. They state that 3GB can be used by Windows XP, although I have read at other places it could handle "as much" as 3.2GB.

What is true here? (I couldn't find any good information on Wiki on this either)

**dj_stick** · Dec 27, 2008, 04:57 PM

it depends on how much ram your graphics card has, among ther concerns. Windows 32 only "see" 1.99Gb of Ram on my system (I have 4)

**MIG-31** · Dec 27, 2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bolletje

How come? I'm using 32-bit at the moment and I have nog troubles at all. I can't imagine that is can even be a lot faster...

But maybe I could switch to 64-bit and get 4GB RAM (2 atm). Maybe that should be an improvement...

For me i have found the 64 bit version for more stable than my 32 bit set up i used to use with 2 Gig of ram.

Quote:

Originally Posted by khelben1979

How can you find an operating system that needs 2GB of RAM to be modern?

Nothing to do with the Ram.... Its Vistas appearance around.It is far more clear on my LCD than XP was... Everything is just more polished.

And i have not mentioned anything about Ram !

Knight_Breed · Dec 27, 2008, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khelben1979

That the 32 bit OS of Windows XP only could handle 2.5GB of RAM isn't right according to a source from Tom's hardware. Look here. They state that 3GB can be used by Windows XP, although I have read at other places it could handle "as much" as 3.2GB.

What is true here? (I couldn't find any good information on Wiki on this either)

It isn't about what the OS can handle it is about what it can utilize and I think DJ touched on that. You can certainly have 4G of RAM on your 32 bit OS and if you can afford it I would recommend it actually. Essentially part of the RAM is mapped for other system functions and devices so even if you have 4G installed your software, games, etc can only access approximately 2.5G of that give or take.

What a larger amount of RAM does on a 32 bit OS is allow more of your 2.5G to be accessible and not tied up with system resources. So in fact if your only running 2G on a 32 bit OS then part of that is also not accessible.

A 64 bit OS because it can support 4G+ of RAM does not suffer this limitation and allows better utilization of RAM. So ideally on my system having 8G of RAM would allow complete utilization of my lower 4G of RAM.

Hope this makes sense to you and thanks for the post

(And some links on 32 bit and 64 bit architecture for you if your interested)

x86 architecture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
64-bit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Customgamer1 · Dec 27, 2008, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MIG-31

For me i have found the 64 bit version for more stable than my 32 bit set up i used to use with 2 Gig of ram.

Nothing to do with the Ram.... Its Vistas appearance around.It is far more clear on my LCD than XP was... Everything is just more polished.

And i have not mentioned anything about Ram !

Yeah just something about Vista makes text and everything just really stand out and look way more clear than XP ever did!

khelben1979 · Dec 28, 2008, 09:55 AM

Are the 64 bit version of Windows XP able to utilize more RAM than the 32 bit version? And how much?

mkk · Dec 28, 2008, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khelben1979

Are the 64 bit version of Windows XP able to utilize more RAM than the 32 bit version? And how much?

All of the RAM you can put into a system today.

PandaZ3 · Dec 28, 2008, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khelben1979

Are the 64 bit version of Windows XP able to utilize more RAM than the 32 bit version? And how much?

I believe the actual figure is 32 Gig, but like mkk says all you can get right now.

That is not to say 2 X 2 Gig in a 32 Bit XP or Vista machine won't function well, it just won't use all the Rams capability.

I was using 32 bit XP in a 512 X 2 machine and switched to XP Pro 64 bit and really noticed a new snappiness to the system, so more Ram isn't the only benefit to me.

I on;y tried the Beta versions of 32 bit Vista and did not like them, but I suppose the 32 bit version with SP1 is a lot better than what I had seen.

GigaWatt · Dec 28, 2008, 10:34 AM

using Win Server 2003 EE R2, mostly because it has 32GB of addressing space (which i need so all of my RAM could be read) and i don't want to transfer to a 64bit OS, mostly because of my music production applications which (in most cases) have only 32bit versions of them... besides, it's much faster than XP is and puts those extra GB of RAM i have into good use (not like XP, just leaves them there unused)...

have no intention of moving to Vista... ever...

PandaZ3 · Dec 28, 2008, 11:03 AM

XP64 is derived from Server 2003, I did not realize there were 32 bit versions of Server 2003.

GigaWatt · Dec 28, 2008, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PandaZ3

XP64 is derived from Server 2003, I did not realize there were 32 bit versions of Server 2003.

yep, there are

. as far as i know, the 32bit versions of Server 2003 came out first, the 64bit version of Server 2003 came out second.

josh2thad · Dec 28, 2008, 02:40 PM

Yes.
Played with the pre Rc1 builds... Then made the switch at launch (not something i normally do)

Happy with Ultimate x64 on my desktop and Home Premium X64 on the laptop.

Dec 28, 2008, 09:55 AM	#126
khelben1979 DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Sweden Posts: 72 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	Re: Have you moved to Vista yet? Are the 64 bit version of Windows XP able to utilize more RAM than the 32 bit version? And how much?

Dec 28, 2008, 10:34 AM	#129
GigaWatt Now In Color :D Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Macedonia, Skopje Posts: 2,073 Rep Power: 58 System Specs	Re: Have you moved to Vista yet? using Win Server 2003 EE R2, mostly because it has 32GB of addressing space (which i need so all of my RAM could be read) and i don't want to transfer to a 64bit OS, mostly because of my music production applications which (in most cases) have only 32bit versions of them... besides, it's much faster than XP is and puts those extra GB of RAM i have into good use (not like XP, just leaves them there unused)... have no intention of moving to Vista... ever... __________________ It's not schisophrenia... it's just a voice in my head...

Dec 28, 2008, 11:03 AM	#130
PandaZ3 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Cornelius, Oregon Posts: 401 Rep Power: 0	Re: Have you moved to Vista yet? XP64 is derived from Server 2003, I did not realize there were 32 bit versions of Server 2003. __________________ It has to be Plugged In? To electricity? Video cards in house, MSI HD 3870, ATI X1950 XTX, 1X1900 XTX, X1900 XT and X1900 Crossfire, ASUS and Sapphire X1800 XT's, X850 Pro, X800 Pro, AIW 9600XT, 9600 Pro, 9550 SE, 9200, 7000. XFX 6800 GS

Dec 28, 2008, 02:40 PM	#132
josh2thad DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 431 Rep Power: 0	Re: Have you moved to Vista yet? Yes. Played with the pre Rc1 builds... Then made the switch at launch (not something i normally do) Happy with Ultimate x64 on my desktop and Home Premium X64 on the laptop. __________________ www.proxywad.com *DeskTop* • Q6600 8MB Cache (400x8) 3.2 [Schythe Ninja Plus REV.b] • 4Gb DDR2 800 @888 [CL 5-4-4-12]• MSI P52 Neo 2 • Slient Cooling • XFX 8800 GTS XXX Edition [600/1800] • Thermaltake Tough power • 2.250GB Segate [Storage] Western Digital 320GB 16MB Cache Master• Lappy•Gateway MT6458 • AMD Turion X2 1.6Ghz • 2x 1GB DDR 2 PC 5400 CL 4-4-4-12 • 15.4 X-tra Birght Widescreen [Glossy] 1280x800 ATI x1150 128 MB• 160Gb HDD • Wireless N 300mbps •

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.driverheaven.net/polls/158187-have-you-moved-vista-yet.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
The blog of Björn Johansson: april 2008	This thread	Refback	Nov 26, 2008 06:26 AM
The blog of Björn Johansson: Vista eller XP - Vad ska man ha då??	This thread	Refback	Jun 2, 2008 12:17 PM
Usas Windows Vista? - Pgina 8 - NetPlay	This thread	Refback	Jun 2, 2008 10:42 AM
The blog of Björn Johansson	This thread	Refback	Apr 30, 2008 03:42 PM

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Windows Vista SP1 RC1 Public	Vikingod	Windows Vista Forum	28	Jan 31, 2008 05:47 AM
Ati/AMD Catalyst 7.12 Drivers for Vista rate them and discuss them here!	temeteus82	Windows 7 & Vista Radeon Display Drivers	22	Jan 11, 2008 06:19 AM
What To Do When Windows Vista Crashes: Little-Known Recovery Strategies	Iria	News	2	Jul 1, 2007 01:02 PM
Official Catalyst 7.3 drivers out for XP and Vista rate them here	Spyre	Windows 7 & Vista Radeon Display Drivers	118	Apr 14, 2007 04:18 PM
Problem with dual booting XP + Vista	Rimz	Windows Vista Forum	12	Feb 6, 2007 07:44 AM